Originally posted by skottyj242
What about the always popular John Rauch?

Not so popular, anymore. LOL

SoxxoS

02-03-2004, 01:07 PM

I thought BA was releasing the list tomorrow...

CubKilla

02-03-2004, 01:10 PM

Why is Shingo regarded as a prospect? He's played professional baseball albeit in Japan.

chosk8

02-03-2004, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by SoxxoS
I thought BA was releasing the list tomorrow...
The list is now out in the paper copy of the magazine. Tomorrow the same list will be online.

PaulDrake

02-03-2004, 01:14 PM

Borchard is no longer on my own personal list. Rauch never was.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by CubKilla
Why is Shingo regarded as a prospect? He's played professional baseball albeit in Japan.

No idea..... I think that is pretty stupid myself, but hey, it is their list!

I thought BA was releasing the list tomorrow...

Online yes, it is tomorrow. but those that receive a hard copy subscription got it either yesterday or today.

SoxxoS

02-03-2004, 01:15 PM

I'm looking forward to that chat tomorrow...they reveal a lot of good info if you aren't a subscriber.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Borchard is no longer on my own personal list. Rauch never was.

I agree with your sentiment. Borchard is definitely on his last leg. He needs to show major improvement this year. I was never high on Rauch either, but I think he could still be a decent #4 or #5 starter if all falls right for him.

PaulDrake

02-03-2004, 01:25 PM

Didn't someone get on KW's case at Soxfest about our depleted farm system? Wasn't it supposed to be one of the best in baseball just a few years ago? What happened? Are there guys not on this list that might surprise? As far as the list goes I'm hopeful for Honel, Reed and Sweeney. If this were a thoroughbred race Munoz would be my "longshot" choice. I think he CAN do it, I'm not sure he will.

skottyj242

02-03-2004, 01:26 PM

I was just kidding with Rauch.

maurice

02-03-2004, 01:26 PM

They have seven of the ten I listed when the season ended. I omitted Takatsu (for obvious reasons), Young (because he's still at a very low level), and Munoz (because he's a reliever). McCarthy and Valido just missed the cutoff on my list.

I'm surprised that they didn't keep Rauch on the list for one more year.

SoxxoS

02-03-2004, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Didn't someone get on KW's case at Soxfest about our depleted farm system? Wasn't it supposed to be one of the best in baseball just a few years ago? What happened? Are there guys not on this list that might surprise? As far as the list goes I'm hopeful for Honel, Reed and Sweeney. If this were a thoroughbred race Munoz would be my "longshot" choice. I think he CAN do it, I'm not sure he will.

When your best prospects bust...Rauch and Borchard...that really hurts the farm system overall. Giving up Kip Wells, and Aaron Myette et al. not showing much doesn't help, either.)

Originally posted by skottyj242
What about David Sanders, he did alright early last year.

Not really what you would call a prospect. He is a lower impact reliever that is older. That doesn't mean he won't ever pitch in the Majors again, just that his potential is not as good as these guys.

kittle42

02-03-2004, 01:53 PM

Where's Ken Vining?

Randar68

02-03-2004, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Borchard is no longer on my own personal list. Rauch never was.

Never was??? If that's the case, you're a joke.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
I agree with your sentiment. Borchard is definitely on his last leg. He needs to show major improvement this year. I was never high on Rauch either, but I think he could still be a decent #4 or #5 starter if all falls right for him.

Never high on Rauch?????

He was the #1 player in the organization and Minor League Player of the Year before being injured. Why don't you go back and take a look at the list of former MLPOY's....

Not very high on Takatsu. The rest??? I don't know. I understand the Chris Young stuff, but Pacheco had a fantastic season at AA and he's not terribly old to be a prospect. I love McCarthy, and despite his young age and lack of experience, I think 10 is about right.

Wing and Sweeney ahead of Anderson? I can see Sweeney possibly having a higher ceiling, but anderson has better overall tools at this point in time, plus he's a CF'er.

I understand keeping LTP on the list. Injuries have nagged him the past year and a half, and he's had flashes here and there. We'll see what he does coming back from a winter off...

I can't make too strong a case for removing anyone but Takatsu, really. Maybe Young is a tad overrated, IMO.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Didn't someone get on KW's case at Soxfest about our depleted farm system? Wasn't it supposed to be one of the best in baseball just a few years ago? What happened? Are there guys not on this list that might surprise? As far as the list goes I'm hopeful for Honel, Reed and Sweeney. If this were a thoroughbred race Munoz would be my "longshot" choice. I think he CAN do it, I'm not sure he will.

Munoz will be in the opening day bullpen. When he's not tired, he's been lights out for 2 straight years now.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:04 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
Never high on Rauch?????

He was the #1 player in the organization and Minor League Player of the Year before being injured. Why don't you go back and take a look at the list of former MLPOY's....

*****.

Nope...... I saw Rauch pitch the year he was MLPOY and thought he could be a solid MLB pitcher, but I never bought into the "top of the rotation" hype. His fastball didn't move all that well and his breaking ball was decent, but not great. What made him good is that he had solid command and he threw from an angle no one was used to. That advantage was only going to last so long.

On top of that, from the very beginning there were concerns about his attitude.

Sorry forgive me if I felt like he was more of a back of the rotation guy than the stud-to-be that BA made him out to be.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
Not very high on Takatsu. The rest??? I don't know. I understand the Chris Young stuff, but Pacheco had a fantastic season at AA and he's not terribly old to be a prospect. I love McCarthy, and despite his young age and lack of experience, I think 10 is about right.

Wing and Sweeney ahead of Anderson? I can see Sweeney possibly having a higher ceiling, but anderson has better overall tools at this point in time, plus he's a CF'er.

I understand keeping LTP on the list. Injuries have nagged him the past year and a half, and he's had flashes here and there. We'll see what he does coming back from a winter off...

I can't make too strong a case for removing anyone but Takatsu, really. Maybe Young is a tad overrated, IMO.

Part of BA's SOP is hype and Pacheco had none of that coming into this year. He was never really highly regarded and to be honest with you, his own coaches weren't convinced until halfway through the season. If Pacheco pitches well in Charlotte, or finds his way onto the Sox out of ST (long shot, I know) the hype will begin.

Sweeney is three years younger than Anderson. I am sure that is a big part of why he was ranked higher. Plus, BA along with many scouts, felt he was a legit 1st round pick, who slipped unnecessarily.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 02:08 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
Nope...... I saw Rauch pitch the year he was MLPOY and thought he could be a solid MLB pitcher, but I never bought into the "top of the rotation" hype. His fastball didn't move all that well and his breaking ball was decent, but not great. What made him good is that he had solid command and he threw from an angle no one was used to. That advantage was only going to last so long.

On top of that, from the very beginning there were concerns about his attitude.

Sorry forgive me if I felt like he was more of a back of the rotation guy than the stud-to-be that BA made him out to be.

:?:

ok. I don't know if you've ever stood behind the catcher when he was throwing, but command, knowledge of how to pitch, and 3 pitches you can throw for strikes.

His 90 mph fastball looks like about 95 compared to the rest of the league because of his release point. His MLPOY season, he was consistently in the 92-95 range on that fastball making him even more effective.

This is simply revisionist history if you believe what you are typing.

maurice

02-03-2004, 02:11 PM

The BA list underscores something I was talking about several months ago. Their top ten breaks down as 5 outfielders and 5 pitchers. For those scoring at home, that's 0 cathcers and 0 infielders. Granted, catching is weak all over but, aside from Valido, the Sox have very little in the way of non-OF position prospects.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
Part of BA's SOP is hype and Pacheco had none of that coming into this year. He was never really highly regarded and to be honest with you, his own coaches weren't convinced until halfway through the season. If Pacheco pitches well in Charlotte, or finds his way onto the Sox out of ST (long shot, I know) the hype will begin.

Sweeney is three years younger than Anderson. I am sure that is a big part of why he was ranked higher. Plus, BA along with many scouts, felt he was a legit 1st round pick, who slipped unnecessarily.

I don't disagree with anything you say there, but I can't see how anyone can rank Ryan Wing higher. That's goofy.

Sweeney was a legit 1st round talent, as was Anderson (although he probably went a few picks higher than where most projected). I don't know, but I find it harder to project HS kids than college kids, and Anderson, when he was healthy, proved himself to be a viable talent.

I'm not saying anyone is or isn't wrong and I don't need a history lesson on BA's rankings. It was JMHO. TIFWIW, and nothing more, but I fully understand how BA put together their list.

hold2dibber

02-03-2004, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
On top of that, from the very beginning there were concerns about his attitude.

Please explain.

rdivaldi

02-03-2004, 02:15 PM

Pacheco was repeating AA and is pretty old to be pitching at that level anyway. I applaud BA's decision to leave him off that list.

However, to leave Rauch off is laughable. I understand that he hasn't lived up to his potential, but he had major surgery in mid 2001 and just started coming back into form in the middle-end of 2003.

I also don't agree with putting players who haven't played above Rookie Ball in the top 10. I love Sweeney's talent, but #4? Come on, that's ridiculous...

Randar68

02-03-2004, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by hold2dibber
Please explain.

Ahhh, the always mythical "attitude issues"

Randar68

02-03-2004, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
Pacheco was repeating AA and is pretty old to be pitching at that level anyway. I applaud BA's decision to leave him off that list.

However, to leave Rauch off is laughable. I understand that he hasn't lived up to his potential, but he had major surgery in mid 2001 and just started coming back into form in the middle-end of 2003.

I also don't agree with putting players who haven't played above Rookie Ball in the top 10. I love Sweeney's talent, but #4? Come on, that's ridiculous...

Amen, Rauch should have been 4-7 minimum at the very least. Putting projects like Chris Young and Sweeney (who is 4 years away best case with only 1/2 a year of experience) is laughable.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
Munoz will be in the opening day bullpen. When he's not tired, he's been lights out for 2 straight years now.

I'm not sure Arnie will make the Sox bullpen out of ST. Right now, there only appears to be one slot open and Wunsch and Marte are already in, barring injury. The one slot that seems to be available will likely go to a guy who can go longer. Munoz has shown that ability some, but my guess it will go to someone who was once a starter. Just a hunch.

Can somebody give some details about Young and McCarthy (positions, strengths, weaknesses, etc.) - I don't think I've heard those names before.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
:?:

ok. I don't know if you've ever stood behind the catcher when he was throwing, but command, knowledge of how to pitch, and 3 pitches you can throw for strikes.

His 90 mph fastball looks like about 95 compared to the rest of the league because of his release point. His MLPOY season, he was consistently in the 92-95 range on that fastball making him even more effective.

This is simply revisionist history if you believe what you are typing.

I'm sorry for being right!

For the record, Rauch was at 90-92 while in Birmingham.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:24 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
I don't disagree with anything you say there, but I can't see how anyone can rank Ryan Wing higher. That's goofy.

Sweeney was a legit 1st round talent, as was Anderson (although he probably went a few picks higher than where most projected). I don't know, but I find it harder to project HS kids than college kids, and Anderson, when he was healthy, proved himself to be a viable talent.

I'm not saying anyone is or isn't wrong and I don't need a history lesson on BA's rankings. It was JMHO. TIFWIW, and nothing more, but I fully understand how BA put together their list.

The only thing I can think of is that Anderson's wrist injury came into their thinking. Wrist injuries and hitters don't go together very well. I know the Sox say that he will be 100% by ST, but the fact is this was an injury that existed prior to our drafting him. So there is no guarantee. The wrist may be a big problem or it may never be discussed again. That doubt, could have been part of the reason he wasn't higher.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
Pacheco was repeating AA and is pretty old to be pitching at that level anyway. I applaud BA's decision to leave him off that list.

However, to leave Rauch off is laughable. I understand that he hasn't lived up to his potential, but he had major surgery in mid 2001 and just started coming back into form in the middle-end of 2003.

I also don't agree with putting players who haven't played above Rookie Ball in the top 10. I love Sweeney's talent, but #4? Come on, that's ridiculous...

Pacheco was not repeating AA. 2003 was his first at that level.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:27 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
Ahhh, the always mythical "attitude issues"

You implying that I am making **** up? I find that laughable, because if you knew him or those that knew him well, you would understand completely.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:38 PM

Can somebody give some details about Young and McCarthy (positions, strengths, weaknesses, etc.) - I don't think I've heard those names before.

McCarthy is a 20 year old who is listed at 6'7" and 190. He was drafted in the 17th round out of a JC. The White Sox are taking their time with him.

He was 4-4 with a 2.76 ERA and 15 BB and 79 K in 2002 in Arizona. He was 9-4 with a 3.65 ERA and 15 BB and 125K in 101 IP at Great Falls in 2003, in a hitting dominated league.

He gives up about a hit per inning, but walks next to no one. His build is slight so he may yet add to his velocity. I can't swear to it, but I believe I recall he throws in the low 90's (then again, doesn't everyone? LOL).

Young will play the 2004 season at 20 years old. He was drafted in the 16th round out of a Houston HS in 2001, but did not sign until late, so he made his debut in 2002.

He struggled with average in 2002, hitting only .217 but showed some power. He came on strong at Bristol this past year, hitting .290 with 7 HR 28 RBI and 21 SB. He has a nice mix of power and speed. He walks a decent amount but also strikes out a lot.

He should start 2004 at Kannapolis and we will see how well he can handle the grind of full season baseball.

kittle42

02-03-2004, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
You implying that I am making **** up? I find that laughable, because if you knew him or those that knew him well, you would understand completely.

I think he was just referring to how "attitiude" always seems to be the default problem with many players.

I am always surprised at what sets people off on message boards. :smile:

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by kittle42
I think he was just referring to how "attitiude" always seems to be the default problem with many players.

I am always surprised at what sets people off on message boards. :smile:

Perhaps I am wrong, but I doubt that is what he meant. And nothing set me off, I just asked a question. :smile:

Frater Perdurabo

02-03-2004, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by maurice
The BA list underscores something I was talking about several months ago. Their top ten breaks down as 5 outfielders and 5 pitchers. For those scoring at home, that's 0 cathcers and 0 infielders. Granted, catching is weak all over but, aside from Valido, the Sox have very little in the way of non-OF position prospects.

Agreed. The overall lack of SS-2B-3B prospects is what concerns me most. I don't worry about 1B because outfielders often can be converted into first basemen and 1B/DH types always are in abundance on the free agent market. That's a hole that easily can be filled when necessary. I think the Sox are stable with Crede at 3B for the time being, but the overall organizational dearth of middle infielders (other than Valido) is scary. What makes it worse is that such a situation might lead Valido to advance more quickly than he otherwise would if there was legitimate competition in the form of other middle infield prospects. I sure hope he doesn't become the next Mike Caruso...

rdivaldi

02-03-2004, 03:02 PM

Pacheco was not repeating AA. 2003 was his first at that level.

Crap, my bad. Not too impressive that a 24/25 year old was just reaching AA for the first time?

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by hold2dibber: Please Explain

Rauch has always been very arrogant and rubbed people the wrong way, including some teammates. There was no doubt he had been reading his own press clippings in 2000 and thought he was on top of the world, which in some ways was true.

That arrogance, translated into doubts about his work ethic. He gave a distinct impression that he already belonged in the Majors and was just doing everybody a favor in the Minors.

I have also heard by two people, that he got into it pretty good with KW last year at ST in front of lots of people. The argument got pretty heated. I don't know the details, so I won't pretend to know them or even if this is 100% true, but I do believe something happened between he and KW last year at the minimum. Speculation was that KW decided to leave him in AAA last year to in essence teach him a lesson, hence him not getting called up.

A lot of things with him are speculation and are not firsthand knowledge. But generally when you are hearing things from varied sources, there is usually something to it.

Jon Rauch could be the nicest, most humble guy in the world right now and have the best attitude possible. All I know is that when he was in Birmingham this was a concern and a year later I heard similar things. The report of the argument with KW seems to fit right in. So today, this could be a total non-issue, but in 2000, it was an issue.

hold2dibber

02-03-2004, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
You implying that I am making **** up? I find that laughable, because if you knew him or those that knew him well, you would understand completely.

I don't know him and I don't know anyone who knows him well. So ... can you please explain what you mean?

EDIT: Whoops. Looks like you beat me to it by a few seconds, Rex. Thanks.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
Crap, my bad. Not too impressive that a 24/25 year old was just reaching AA for the first time?

You're right. Pacheco came out of nowhere last year. I have told this story on other boards and I will try not to be too long winded here.

Pacheco was the last pitcher to make the AA team this year and was in line to be the first pitcher sent back to Winston-Salem when a move had to be made. He was the last guy used out of the bullpen and was used in mop up situations only early on.

He pitched well in his limited time and started to get better innings. After an injury or two, they needed him for a spot start and he threw really well. He continued to throw better and better as the season progressed, culminating with being completely dominating in the SL playoffs. Against Huntsville (Brewers) in Game 1, he faced the minimum 27 batters shutting out the Stars. He gave up two singles and one walk and all three runners were erased - one thrown out stealing and two on DP's. He came back to start Game 5 on short rest and threw four more scoreless innings, the most the Sox would let him pitch.

By the end of the year he was consistently hitting 92-94, topping out at 95. He doesn't walk many but also doesn't strike out a ton for a guy with his velocity (116 in 151 IP). He has a very good breaking ball and his changeup was more than serviceable, although he did not throw it very often.

From what I understand, Barons Pitching Coach Juan Nieves is largely responsible for his improvement. Pacheco was deemed lazy and indifferent, although he always had a good arm. Nieves got him to learn the value of working hard in between starts and the conditioning program. I think he convinced Pacheco that he was throwing his talent away and would be released or sent back to Class A if he didn't step it up.

If he continues to work hard and improves half as much as he did last year, the Sox will have a bonafide starter on their hands. If not, he could get stuck in AAA.

chisoxfan79

02-03-2004, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
Pacheco was repeating AA and is pretty old to be pitching at that level anyway. I applaud BA's decision to leave him off that list.

However, to leave Rauch off is laughable. I understand that he hasn't lived up to his potential, but he had major surgery in mid 2001 and just started coming back into form in the middle-end of 2003.

I also don't agree with putting players who haven't played above Rookie Ball in the top 10. I love Sweeney's talent, but #4? Come on, that's ridiculous... I agree with Pacheco about leaving him off the top ten. I have heard the strike zone in the AA Southern League is as big as house that is why alot of pithcers have good stats in that league remember Cotts stats. Also about Pacheco, if he is so good why didn't Texas take him in the Carl Everrett trade I remember him being in the list of eight players the Rangers had to choose from

PaulDrake

02-03-2004, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
Never was??? If that's the case, you're a joke. I'd rather make people laugh than cry. When Rauch makes the ML to stay then we'll both have another laugh on me. Until then I stick to my original assessment. He ain't got it.

soxtalker

02-03-2004, 04:07 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Didn't someone get on KW's case at Soxfest about our depleted farm system? Wasn't it supposed to be one of the best in baseball just a few years ago? What happened? Are there guys not on this list that might surprise? As far as the list goes I'm hopeful for Honel, Reed and Sweeney. If this were a thoroughbred race Munoz would be my "longshot" choice. I think he CAN do it, I'm not sure he will.

What did KW say?

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 04:12 PM

Originally posted by chisoxfan79
I agree with Pacheco about leaving him off the top ten. I have heard the strike zone in the AA Southern League is as big as house that is why alot of pithcers have good stats in that league remember Cotts stats. Also about Pacheco, if he is so good why didn't Texas take him in the Carl Everrett trade I remember him being in the list of eight players the Rangers had to choose from

You have a very good point on the Rangers and I think I can help answer that.

First off, the strike zone is bigger in the Minors (at least theoretically), but that really has nothing to do with anything because pitchers improve as the move up (or should) and it is the same for all pitchers across the board.

Back to the Rangers....

After the Everett trade was announced, both Pacheco and Frank Francisco pitched very well. For some reason, there was no Rangers scout present for Pacheco's first start after the trade when he was absolutely dominant. He tossed 7 IP, gave up 6 hits and struck out 8, while walking none. In his next start, when a Rangers scout was present, he was still good, but not as good. On July 11, he threw 5 IP and gave up four hits, an unearned run, but walked four and struck out just one. The next outing he tossed 6.1 IP gave up seven hits and 2 runs, both earned.

Francisco at the same time had two starts where he gave up only one hit in 7 IP with a short 3 inning stint sandwiched in between. I am not sure why that start was so short other than he gave up 2 ER in those three innings.

Rupe on the other hand didn't pitch as well but from my understanding he is someone the Rangers had already set their sights on.

It likely boiled down to which games the Rangers scouts saw and a decision between Pacheco and Francisco. I for one, had a big sigh of relief when they chose Francisco.

hose

02-03-2004, 04:25 PM

Rex what is your take on Ryan Wing ?

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by hose
Rex what is your take on Ryan Wing ?

I've heard good things, but I haven't seen him or really heard much in terms of detail. He is one of the guys I am looking forward to seeing this year. I kept an eye on him from the beginning because it seemed he got overshadowed by Honel yet still performed well.

I hope he and Honel can both be strong in AA this year.

Daver

02-03-2004, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
I've heard good things, but I haven't seen him or really heard much in terms of detail. He is one of the guys I am looking forward to seeing this year. I kept an eye on him from the beginning because it seemed he got overshadowed by Honel yet still performed well.

I hope he and Honel can both be strong in AA this year.

Wing was drafted as a project,he was an outfielder till he started Juco and was converted into a pitcher,and still struggles at times with his mechanics,though repeating a year at high A has aleved this somewhat.

rdivaldi

02-03-2004, 04:33 PM

For those interested in Ryan Wing, here's a little blurb on him from strikethree.com, it was written last summer:

On the White Sox side of the ball, there was a bit more to see. Southpaw Ryan Wing, the organization's second-round choice in 2001, was on the hill and looking to build on his early-season success. He flashed an 88-91 MPH fastball with tailing movement but only average command. There were stretches where he seemed to be guessing on where his fastball may end up.

Wing's secondary pitch has slider-type movement, but I was assured it is really a cut fastball. At 83-85 MPH and running away from left-handers, this can be a very solid second pitch. He didn't show much of a feel for a changeup, however, and had to rely on his cutter more than he would have liked.

There's definitely potential with Wing, but I can't say he distinguished himself from the rest of lefties trying to make the show. When you watch him throw, you don't walk away thinking "big-league pitcher". He's going to need a third pitch and improved command to keep moving up the ladder. I'll make an effort to see him again later this year and report on his progress.

hose

02-03-2004, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
I've heard good things, but I haven't seen him or really heard much in terms of detail. He is one of the guys I am looking forward to seeing this year. I kept an eye on him from the beginning because it seemed he got overshadowed by Honel yet still performed well.

I hope he and Honel can both be strong in AA this year.

Wing has put up good numbers, hopefully he will keep it up as he progresses through the system.

Figure Honel might get a shot in 2005, from what I've read the Sox don't want to rush him.

hose

02-03-2004, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
For those interested in Ryan Wing, here's a little blurb on him from strikethree.com, it was written last summer:

On the White Sox side of the ball, there was a bit more to see. Southpaw Ryan Wing, the organization's second-round choice in 2001, was on the hill and looking to build on his early-season success. He flashed an 88-91 MPH fastball with tailing movement but only average command. There were stretches where he seemed to be guessing on where his fastball may end up.

Wing's secondary pitch has slider-type movement, but I was assured it is really a cut fastball. At 83-85 MPH and running away from left-handers, this can be a very solid second pitch. He didn't show much of a feel for a changeup, however, and had to rely on his cutter more than he would have liked.

There's definitely potential with Wing, but I can't say he distinguished himself from the rest of lefties trying to make the show. When you watch him throw, you don't walk away thinking "big-league pitcher". He's going to need a third pitch and improved command to keep moving up the ladder. I'll make an effort to see him again later this year and report on his progress.

good report.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 04:43 PM

A side note on Pacheco:

His biggest weakness last year was inconsistency within the strike zone and from inning to inning. One inning he would be perfect and the ball would be exactly where he needed to throw it. the next, he would still throw strikes, but he would miss over the middle of the plate or he would throw up when the target was low or inside instead of out.

This cost him a lot of strikeouts and made him more hittable. throwing 93-94 allowed for some margin of error. Consistency is what he will need to improve on this season.

Another factor with some pitchers coming out of Birmingham is that the Hoover Met is a big time pitcher's park. Keeping an eye on the home/road splits helps see if there are variances that could cause alarm.

Pacheco was stellar both home and road this past year, so that is not a big concern of mine. Not counting the playoffs, he was 5-1 with a 2.34 ERA at home and 7-1 with a 2.78 ERA on the road. Often times in the past, there has been a full run difference in ERA in the home/road split.

maurice

02-03-2004, 04:43 PM

The theory that Rauch invoked KW's wrath by arguing with him is believable. KW is known to make roster moves based on petty politics rather than ability. IMHO, Rauch's numbers justified a late-season callup, certainly over Adkins and (arguably) over Cotts. Then again, maybe it's just a coincidence that those guys came to the Sox in one-sided trades.

The big issue with Rauch is his health. The tools are there, and he's very effective when he's healthy. Ask the Twins.

RichFitztightly

02-03-2004, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by hose
Figure Honel might get a shot in 2005, from what I've read the Sox don't want to rush him.

The Sox don't want to Rush him!? Holy Crap, why wasn't I informed of their change in philosophy?

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 04:45 PM

For instance (and yes, I know this is a very small sample size), here are Rauch's home/road splits from 2000 in Birmingham:

EDIT: Sorry, I don't know how to use the formatting on this site. If someone could fix that for me, I would appreciate it. Thanks

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 04:50 PM

Wing was drafted as a project,he was an outfielder till he started Juco and was converted into a pitcher,and still struggles at times with his mechanics,though repeating a year at high A has aleved this somewhat.

Daver, are you on crack again?? LOL

Wing didn't repeat High A or any level. He pitched one game in Bristol in 2001, the whole season in Kannapolis in 2002 and last year in Winston-Salem.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
Perhaps I am wrong, but I doubt that is what he meant. And nothing set me off, I just asked a question. :smile:

No, but at some point or another in the careers of MANY prospects who have been through difficult times, some sort of character issue or flaw is relayed through someone who knows someone who heard it through a friend that the guy is arrogant or cocky or has no work ethic (this one is hogwash in Jon's case) or he's a nightmare in the clubhouse, or he doesn't listen to his coaches.

Please. I've had enough of that crap. 99% of players these days fall under one of these categories, so for the most part, it is something that is not relevant to a prospect's future or potential.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 05:02 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
No, but at some point or another in the careers of MANY prospects who have been through difficult times, some sort of character issue or flaw is relayed through someone who knows someone who heard it through a friend that the guy is arrogant or cocky or has no work ethic (this one is hogwash in Jon's case) or he's a nightmare in the clubhouse, or he doesn't listen to his coaches.

Please. I've had enough of that crap. 99% of players these days fall under one of these categories, so for the most part, it is something that is not relevant to a prospect's future or potential.

We'll agree to disagree, because I know of many a player that character issues hindered their development. I am not going to get into tossing names around, so we'll just leave it at that. I say character and approach do matter. Sometimes more than others and sometimes guys grow up (maturity), so no it is not an end all evaluative tool, but it can certainly get in the way.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 05:06 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
We'll agree to disagree, because I know of many a player that character issues hindered their development. I am not going to get into tossing names around, so we'll just leave it at that. I say character and approach do matter. Sometimes more than others and sometimes guys grow up (maturity), so no it is not an end all evaluative tool, but it can certainly get in the way.

I cannot disagree with that, but if you're going to bring it up in direct relation to a given player, you'd better be ready to justify it with information and substance. Certain character issues are worse than others, no doubt, but I have NEVER heard of any character issues with Rauch and that has come from coaches and players as well. I never asked about it, but it was certainly never volunteered.

Now, if KW has a thing with him, what player hasn't? I couldn't blame Rauch for arguing with KW over the way he's been handled, could you????

Huisj

02-03-2004, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Borchard is no longer on my own personal list. Rauch never was.

Never? Even after he was named minor league player of the year after a dominating year in which he showed total mastery of the strike zone and good pitching ability? Even with him being 83 inches tall? Never on your list at all? I find that hard to believe that you never thought that he had a chance to be good.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by Huisj
Never? Even after he was named minor league player of the year after a dominating year in which he showed total mastery of the strike zone and good pitching ability? Even with him being 83 inches tall? Never on your list at all? I find that hard to believe that you never thought that he had a chance to be good.

I was never that high on Rauch but of course he was one of their top 10 prospects at one time....he'll catch one with someone someday and be a halfway decent pitcher. Too bad he'll never get that chance here.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by poorme
I was never that high on Rauch but of course he was one of their top 10 prospects at one time....he'll catch one with someone someday and be a halfway decent pitcher. Too bad he'll never get that chance here.

Originally posted by Randar68
That's cause that guy probably can't remember 2000 very clearly. What, about 9 years old? Is this the way you always react to those who disagree with you? Most 9 year olds are more mature. Dude.

Wasn't Anderson taken before Sweeney in the past draft? I just find that odd that a player taken below the first pick is rated better. Anyone clarify this for me? Both are outfielders, correct? Sorry with all of the questions, I'm not too familiar with the Sox farm system and am hoping to learn.

SoxxoS

02-03-2004, 07:09 PM

Originally posted by CWSGuy406
Wasn't Anderson taken before Sweeney in the past draft? I just find that odd that a player taken below the first pick is rated better. Anyone clarify this for me? Both are outfielders, correct? Sorry with all of the questions, I'm not too familiar with the Sox farm system and am hoping to learn.

We will find out tomorrow for sure, but Anderson's season ended prematurely due to a wrist injury, which might concern BA...and Sweeney's ceiling may be higher because he is younger and has all those "tools."

Randar68

02-03-2004, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Is this the way you always react to those who disagree with you? Most 9 year olds are more mature. Dude.

He was the player of the year in all of the minors and representted this country on par with Roy Oswalt and Ben Sheets. But hey, I'm sure the many scouts as well as BA who saw him frequently are wrong, and you, the armchair history revisionist is right.

*****, DUDE. here's a quarter, go buy yourself a clue.

A spade is a spade, and a moron is an moron. minor League player of the year, but he wasn't on your top 10 list??? HAHAHAHAHAHA

BLA.

CWSGuy406

02-03-2004, 07:31 PM

A bit off topic, but for anyone who's been through this, is it a big adjustment from switching from a metal bat (high school/college) to the wooden bat (minor/major leagues)? I ask this because, can a prospect be rated highly because of his high school/college play, and then suck in the minors just because of the switch (metal to wood)? Anyone who's done it can probably answer that first hand...

Randar68

02-03-2004, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by CWSGuy406
Wasn't Anderson taken before Sweeney in the past draft? I just find that odd that a player taken below the first pick is rated better. Anyone clarify this for me? Both are outfielders, correct? Sorry with all of the questions, I'm not too familiar with the Sox farm system and am hoping to learn.

You are correct. Anderson is a potential 5-tool CF'er. Sweeney is likely to be a RF'er, but he has a great swing and good power potential from the left side. Good eye, too. Both have fabulous arms and have both been pitchers recently.

Anderson wasn't as highly rated going into his last season at Arizona, as he had been injured the previous year after a terrific Freshman season. He worked extremely hard with the head coach to rework his swing and approach at the plate. Great work ethic and a really great guy. IIRC, wrist injury was not as severe as Nomar's and he should be fine, but as some have said, you never really know.

Sweeney fought some nagging injuries and didn't get to play as many games as they'd have liked this past season, but MAY have a higher ceiling if he develops better power, but he's already a very well built guy, so there's some doubt about to what degree that may happen. He has a very smooth swing that has been compared to Olerud. As a left hander with a lot of athletic ability, he could also develop into a 1b if the Sox decide to pursure that.

Personally, i'd like to see them try him at first, but it's obviously his offense that will get him moving up the ranks...

Randar68

02-03-2004, 07:35 PM

Originally posted by CWSGuy406
A bit off topic, but for anyone who's been through this, is it a big adjustment from switching from a metal bat (high school/college) to the wooden bat (minor/major leagues)? I ask this because, can a prospect be rated highly because of his high school/college play, and then suck in the minors just because of the switch (metal to wood)? Anyone who's done it can probably answer that first hand...

These days, camps, All-Star games, etc are often wood bat for this purpose. Yes, metal-bat power does not always translate. However, showcases and such hthese days give scouts a chance to get to see this. Anderson this past year put on a BP show with a wood bat and practiced and worked out extensively with wood his whole college career, IIRC...

PaulDrake

02-03-2004, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
Nope...... I saw Rauch pitch the year he was MLPOY and thought he could be a solid MLB pitcher, but I never bought into the "top of the rotation" hype. His fastball didn't move all that well and his breaking ball was decent, but not great. What made him good is that he had solid command and he threw from an angle no one was used to. That advantage was only going to last so long.

On top of that, from the very beginning there were concerns about his attitude.

Sorry forgive me if I felt like he was more of a back of the rotation guy than the stud-to-be that BA made him out to be. I think this is as good an assessment as any I've seen. Since I live in the Charlotte area I try to see the AAA club as much as possible. Rauch and Borchard were of special interest to me, and I must admit to being deeply disappointed in both players. Borchard needs major work on his swing and Rauch is what can I say? Just not impressive in any way, no matter how mad that makes some people. Last year in a game against Rochester he was getting lit up pretty well. He gave up a towering home run and then just glared at his catcher for about 10-15 seconds. I asked the person I was with if I had missed something. Had he been shaking the catcher off? No, was the answer. Whatever. He gave me the impression of being very thin skinned. Of course it woud be great for the Sox if both of these players were able to overcome and succeed. I don't need to be right. I root for the Sox. I don't need to try to bully other posters about it either.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 10:36 PM

Now, if KW has a thing with him, what player hasn't? I couldn't blame Rauch for arguing with KW over the way he's been handled, could you????

I'll just agree with you on that one. I do think he was handled wrong in a big way when he was kept in Chicago to start the 2002 season. Anytime I get into discussions over how KW relates with anyone, it gets ugly, so we'll just stop here. LOL

Randar68

02-03-2004, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
I think this is as good an assessment as any I've seen. Since I live in the Charlotte area I try to see the AAA club as much as possible. Rauch and Borchard were of special interest to me, and I must admit to being deeply disappointed in both players. Borchard needs major work on his swing and Rauch is what can I say? Just not impressive in any way, no matter how mad that makes some people. Last year in a game against Rochester he was getting lit up pretty well. He gave up a towering home run and then just glared at his catcher for about 10-15 seconds. I asked the person I was with if I had missed something. Had he been shaking the catcher off? No, was the answer. Whatever. He gave me the impression of being very thin skinned. Of course it woud be great for the Sox if both of these players were able to overcome and succeed. I don't need to be right. I root for the Sox. I don't need to try to bully other posters about it either.

Paul. The pitcher you saw is admittedly not the pitcher he was in 2000. However, what you are saying, I have no disagreement with. I disagree strongly with those who now profess to have never considered Rauch highly when pretty much every scout I have ever talked to that saw him before his injury thought he was a top of the rotation starter. One guy is saying he was never in his top 10!?!?!? *****. That is a joke. People are entitled to their opinions, but in the same vein, I'm entitled to call them revisionist historian, morons, etc.

That is all.

Randar68

02-03-2004, 10:41 PM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
I'll just agree with you on that one. I do think he was handled wrong in a big way when he was kept in Chicago to start the 2002 season. Anytime I get into discussions over how KW relates with anyone, it gets ugly, so we'll just stop here. LOL

Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of KW's moves, and I can't really tell if you are pro/anti or just strongly opinioned on KW, but he has his strong and weak points, as does most anyone. I was extremely disappointed in how Rauch was handled before and after his injury. He was just overworked following his 2000 season plus the Olympics straight into ST. He'd never pitched that much in his life...

I think because he was average last year and really didn't improve his stock. The Sox haven't decided on one role for him either, moving him from the rotation to the bullpen and back, and I don't think that helps either.

The BA list tends to gravitate toward guys on the upswing (unless you are a big-time bonus baby/1st round pick) rather than guys who seem stalled in AAA. That leads evaluators to think his impact in the Majors will be minor if any.

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by CWSGuy406
A bit off topic, but for anyone who's been through this, is it a big adjustment from switching from a metal bat (high school/college) to the wooden bat (minor/major leagues)? I ask this because, can a prospect be rated highly because of his high school/college play, and then suck in the minors just because of the switch (metal to wood)? Anyone who's done it can probably answer that first hand...

I'll try to answer this differently and more generally than already has been done. Randar was right in that kids these days have more opportunities to hit with wood bats than ever before.

There is a huge difference between wood and aluminum. In the simplest terms the sweet spot on an aluminum bat is 4-5 inches or greater in length. On a wood bat is is about an inch and a half to two inches. So the margin for error to hit the ball well is much greater with an aluminum bat.

A hitter can get jammed with an aluminum bat and the bat will still allow for him to get the ball over the infielder's heads or even farther sometimes. A wood bat will break and the ball will die coming off the bat. Of course, with some players that are really strong, that effect is lessened.

The other difference is the weight, which means bat speed. It is much harder to generate bat speed with wood, therefore more difficult to hit the ball well.

Due to all of the above, there is a big adjustment going from aluminum to wood. Some guys make it better than others. Wood bats often expose holes in a players swing and they have to learn to adjust their swing or fail.

That help?

Rex Hudler

02-03-2004, 11:19 PM

Randar, this tell you anything?? This was posted by someone at SoxFest from another Sox board.

Is there something physically wrong with Rauch? Lately, there is no mention of him as even a possibility, and he went from number one in all of baseball, to off of the Sox top ten prospects?

I specifically asked Loaiza that question at 1AM in the hotel bar at Soxfest, and he said he has good stuff, but then pointed at his head, like Rauch was either empty upstairs, or immature.

I promise I don't make this stuff up. LOL

jeremyb1

02-04-2004, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
Randar, this tell you anything?? This was posted by someone at SoxFest from another Sox board.

Is there something physically wrong with Rauch? Lately, there is no mention of him as even a possibility, and he went from number one in all of baseball, to off of the Sox top ten prospects?

I specifically asked Loaiza that question at 1AM in the hotel bar at Soxfest, and he said he has good stuff, but then pointed at his head, like Rauch was either empty upstairs, or immature.

I promise I don't make this stuff up. LOL

What's ironic about that is that Loaiza himself was purported to be a headcase in Tortonto because he seemed distracted and was constantly talking on his cell phone when in reality what was going on was that his wife had serious health problems. What that goes to show in my opinion is that the headcase label is thrown around far too often by people who have very limited knowledge of another pitcher's situation.

I myself have limited knowledge of the situation but I can certainly see where Rauch might have become somewhat thin skinned and easily aggitated after being named the top prospect in the game and then experiencing an arm injury that robbed him of his velocity and the life on his pitches for a significant period of time. Regardless of the causes, unless Rauch's work ethic truly is a huge problem which prevents him from improving, I fail to see his attitude as a huge problem. There are plenty of headcases in this game that have been incredibly successful. Look at D. Wells, Jim Edmonds, Clemens, Albert Belle, and Barry Bonds. If Rauch can thrown the ball as he did down the stretch in Charlotte last season, his attitude should be a non-factor.

chosk8

02-04-2004, 09:19 AM

Originally posted by Randar68
Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of KW's moves, and I can't really tell if you are pro/anti or just strongly opinioned on KW, but he has his strong and weak points, as does most anyone. I was extremely disappointed in how Rauch was handled before and after his injury. He was just overworked following his 2000 season plus the Olympics straight into ST. He'd never pitched that much in his life...

I agree with you on how Rauch was handled prior to his injury. He was a bonafide prospect and to say any different is ludicrous. As far as KW goes, the thing that bothers me is the way he is depleting our farm system. I know there are many on this board that would rather trade away "prospects" for proven major league talent. My problem is that I'm not sure which way this team is going. Instead of making a few moves this off-season and signing a few free agents, KW insists that if they are in the think of things at mid-season, he will go out and make the necessary moves, which will further deplete our system. And to be quite honest, big deal, so what if we win the AL Central. Are we really going to be able to compete with the likes of Boston and New York in the playoffs? Absolutely not. And then, once again, we finish high enough to have a middle of the pack draft pick. The cubs can boast about having 2 stud pitchers in their rotation, but when you suck year in and year out and draft in the top 5 fairly consistently, you're bound to come away with a few gems. Believe me, I don't ever want to fall to those depths, but with our middle of the pack drafting position and the "self-imposed" budget, I think our farm system is very valuable. KW has shown an eye for finding talent in the likes of Marte,Cotts, Diaz, Pacheco and to some extent Loaiza. A few of those guys have helped to bolster our farm system and at little cost, like Lofton, Guerrier and Howry.

BA has their list of prospect online today and the most interesting quote from their breakdown was about Arnie Munoz having "Eddie Guardado potential". Lets hope he, Honel and Wing are the real deal and not over-hyped like some of the "prospects" a few years earlier.

rdivaldi

02-04-2004, 10:12 AM

What was the official breakdown of the top 10?

Was it the exact same as people were saying yesterday?

chosk8

02-04-2004, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
What was the official breakdown of the top 10?

Was it the exact same as people were saying yesterday?

Yes it is.

Voodoo or one of the other Mods...is there any way I could post the Top 10 and write-ups that go along with each of the prospects without violating any copyright laws? Screen shots possibly and posting the images? The breakdown of prospects 2-10 is in the subscriber only portion of their site.

rdivaldi

02-04-2004, 10:39 AM

Cool.

Do they have any "honorable mentions"?

Rex Hudler

02-04-2004, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
What was the official breakdown of the top 10?

Was it the exact same as people were saying yesterday?

Yes, because the list yesterday was typed from the print edition which hit mailboxes Monday and Tuesday.

chosk8

02-04-2004, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by rdivaldi
Cool.

Do they have any "honorable mentions"?

Rex posted yesterday that "10a. Brandon Mccarthy (bumped for the 35-yr old Shingo)". The online version doesn't list any honorable mentions, but the paper edition may. I haven't had a chance to read through it, I just glanced at the selections.

Rex Hudler

02-04-2004, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by chosk8
Rex posted yesterday that "10a. Brandon Mccarthy (bumped for the 35-yr old Shingo)". The online version doesn't list any honorable mentions, but the paper edition may. I haven't had a chance to read through it, I just glanced at the selections.

I haven't read the paper edition so I don't know who they mentioned as "others considered". I got the list yesterday from someone else who got the print edition.

I do know that McCarthy was originally #10 on the list. Unless they did some funky re-working of the list when takatsu was added, I would suspect he will be #11 when the Prospect Handbook comes out.

doublem23

02-04-2004, 12:31 PM

Originally posted by PaulDrake
Borchard is no longer on my own personal list. Rauch never was.

And Baseball America hasn't hired you yet? No way!

PaulDrake

02-04-2004, 01:02 PM

Originally posted by doublem23
And Baseball America hasn't hired you yet? No way! You'd think I went and slapped someones kid. Well seeing that as of this moment the Sox don't really have a center fielder or 4th and 5th starters, then it would be a good thing if Borchard and Rauch rose up to prove us naysayers wrong.

LATruBlue

02-04-2004, 01:50 PM

He is the top 50 list from John Sickels Book for Baseball Prospects. Just thought I'd add this in for comparative informational purposes only.

This is a quote from the poster regarding the list. This was from a Dodger board as to why the guy is talking about Dodgers.

Um well in the book he doesn't rate each team's prospects against each other. But he gives each player a rating A, B, or C. "A" being elite players that can be superstars and B being players that might be superstars or good players, C players that can contribute but maybe as a bench player. Only Miller and Jackson got A's. Loney, and Hanrahan both got B+'s. which is pretty good. Guittierez got a B. Just kinda flipping threw his ratings on the teams; there are many teams that according to him don't have any "A" players, let alone 2 "A" pitchers. Actually the dodgers are the only team with 2 "A" pitchers. I can't put each players info down right now cause i'll be here all day, but I can post this.

Here's the link (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/chat/020404whitesoxchat.html) to BA's length Sox prospect chat, hosted by WSI's very own Phil Rogers with questions from Randar, Rex, and others.

Randar68

02-05-2004, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by maurice
Here's the link (http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/chat/020404whitesoxchat.html) to BA's length Sox prospect chat, hosted by WSI's very own Phil Rogers with questions from Randar, Rex, and others.

I got at least 4, maybe 5 in there, LOL! RJB is also me, LOL!

Rex Hudler

02-05-2004, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by Randar68
I got at least 4, maybe 5 in there, LOL! RJB is also me, LOL!

By the way, randar, I completely agree with you that Jeremy Reed is a natural two-hole hitter and not a leadoff guy. In time, he could become a solid three-hole guy, but that depends on how he develops power.

Randar68

02-06-2004, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by Rex Hudler
By the way, randar, I completely agree with you that Jeremy Reed is a natural two-hole hitter and not a leadoff guy. In time, he could become a solid three-hole guy, but that depends on how he develops power.

Yep, if only they could have gotten a guy like Luis Castillo. Castillo, Reed, whoever would be one hell of a top of the order, one this team has not had in my recollection.